Adult Stem Cells Work Better, MSM Only Likes Embryonic Kind. Hmm.

The two topics happen to be linked: Sophisticated stem cell medicine — in which a patient’s own fatty tissue is harvested and processed for the patient’s own adult (autologous) stem cells, then reinjected for regenerative healing — is available in the United States and Canada, but only for animals. Elsewhere in the world — the Regenerative Medicine Institute at Tijuana’s impressive Hospital Angeles, for example, just 20 minutes outside San Diego — adult stem cells have been shown to have remarkable efficacy in treating a variety of diseases.

As a pet advocate with a medical condition that would most efficiently be helped by a simple stem cell procedure, I happen to be personally invested in both subjects. After my dog Sam underwent a procedure pioneered by Vet-Stem in San Diego, I saw first-hand how stem cells can get an arthritic, dejected old K9 walking and genuinely enjoying life again. But even if you don’t give a damn about animals and their welfare, here’s why you should care about stem cells: Because what works for dogs also works for humans, as a long history of scientific testing has shown at great cost to canine life. Because at any time, you or someone you love could develop a condition that diminishes quality of life or actually threatens it, and stem cells could dramatically improve it.

If you’re an American with a nagging medical problem that’s negatively impacting your life, you will have to travel abroad to receive treatment. It’s a costly proposition, as your health insurance provider won’t cover any part of it. Still, many Americans frustrated by declining health and understandably eager to improve their quality of life are booking flights to state-of-the-art facilities where they can expect to receive high-tech treatments (for orthopedic injury, arthritis, multiple sclerosis, spinal injury, COPD, cardiovascular disease, and many other conditions) that American hospitals simply cannot offer.

Many are returning home significantly improved — like Bartolo Colon. Sidelined by a series of arm and shoudler injuries, the pitcher underwent adult stem cell therapy in May in the Dominican Republic. Samples of his fat and bone marrow were processed for his own stem cells, then injected into the afflicted areas of his arm to repair ligament damage and a torn rotator cuff. The procedure had previously been shown to work for sidelined race horses; that was good enough for Colon, who is now at work for the Yankees, in the pink of health, delighting his fans.

But cases like Colon’s tend to sink to the bottom of the media pool, where — if they’re registered at all — they’re covered with an audible tsk-tsk (“Pitcher’s Treatment Draws Scrutiny,” read the disapproving New York Timesheadline). Or worse, they’re savaged by bottom feeders. In an openly biased and shoddily reported article for MSNBC titled “Stem Cell Clinics Ripping Off Patients, Bullying Scientists,” Arthur Caplan, Ph.D. — director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania — describes Colon’s experience as “the fringe adventures of the Yankee star.” (Dr. Joseph Purita, the Florida physician who traveled to the Dominic Republic to treat Colon, is not even named.) He also dismisses overseas doctors’ well-documented advances in treating spinal-cord injury as “charlatan claims” and “nonsense.”

Not content to dismiss Colon as a medical tourist, Caplan ridicules the stem-cell industry as “more voodoo than science,” categorically critiquing overseas clinics for “charg[ing] a hefty fee” (as if American doctors offered low-cost services). And, just to make sure his readers won’t have a chance of finding a cure for what ails them, Caplan is careful not to mention these “crackpot” clinics by name — although a quick internet search makes it clear that one facility he references is Panama’s Institute for Cellular Medicine, where documented strides have been made in treating patients with spinal-cord injury, multiple sclerosis, and Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Sadly, the MSM as a whole may be relied on to display Caplan’s bias against stem cells by burying and/or ridiculing the success stories, even high-profile ones like Colon’s. They don’t bother to mention that in the past five years more than 50,000 scientific studies on stem cells were published and posted in the National Institutes of Health medical library, according to America’s leading adult stem cell scientist Dr. Christian Drapeau (author of Cracking the Stem Cell Code and Stem Cell Theory of Renewal). They ignore extremely reputable facilities such as Hospital Angeles, where patient safety is such a high priority that it has 23 Internal Review Board reviewed treatment protocols. (Under FDA regulations, an IRB is an appropriately constituted group formally designated to review and monitor biomedical research involving human subjects, and it is nearing the completion of its accreditation with the International Cell Medicine Society for offshore [non-U.S.] treatment of chronic disease.)

These are the controversial cells, harvested from dead human fetuses, that most people presume to be the foundation of all cell medicine. For the MSM, embryonic stem cells are not voodoo nonsense; they are cool, cutting-edge, sexy. They are headline-grabbers. They have the highly mediagenic property of “pluripotency” — the ability to morph into any type of cell in the body.

But adult stem cells are proven more effective and less risky than embryonic cells. Yet only embryonic stem cells and their supporters merit coverage in the MSM, despite the fact that fetal cells do not perform successfully in clinical trials.

In his article, Caplan staunchly defends the International Society for Stem Cell Research, lamenting its decision to shut down its web site, a portal that did little more than scare visitors away from adult stem cell therapies that might have helped them. He alleges that “some in the industry launched a barrage of legal threats at the ISSCR which, as a small scientific organization, felt it could not afford to fight even if, in the end, they would win.” Caplan doesn’t quote or even mention the ISSCR’s founder, Dr. Irv Weissman, an embryonic cell cheerleader who has been roundly criticized by his clinical peers for purposely ignoring advances made in the area of adult stem cells. I call that extremely biased, not to mention foolish — reporting that presumes and promotes reader ignorance.

The sad reality is that right now American technology’s highest apex is Facebook and Twitter; our medical advances are lagging seriously behind those of other countries — even behind the enormous strides made by veterinary medical researchers right here in the United States. The duty of the MSM should be to report medical advances fairly and accurately, wherever and however they occur, to put pressure on the FDA to approve the use of adult stem cells in American human medical practice. Our country could once again be a world competitor in medicine; re-establishing the United States as a global medical leader can only help our economy by creating jobs and keeping patient spending on our shores.

Until then, Americans motivated to take advantage of the best that modern science has to offer will continue to make travel arrangements for treatment. And for that, they deserve to be applauded as the pioneers they are, not pooh-poohed as medical tourists.

Journalist and author Julia Szabo wrote the Pets column for the Sunday New York Post, for 11 years and now pens the "Living With Dogs" column for Dogster.com. Follow her on Twitter @PetReporter1. Photo credit: Daniel Reichert

Click here to view the 31 legacy comments

Click here to hide legacy comments

31 Comments, 15 Threads

1.
VM

There’s actually plenty of treatments done in the US that depend on adult stem cells. For example, the “bone marrow transplant” my husband received for his leukemia was actually made of stem cells derived from his sister. But again, one might not know about such things unless one were personally involved with a case, thanks to the MSM. They did they best to make it seem that all stem cell research had been forbidden by an eeeevul anti-science Republican (even though Bush never outlawed even embryonic stem cell research — didn’t even eliminate federal funding for that, just said it wouldn’t be extended to any new strains developed after his decree.) So it’s no surprise that people wouldn’t know how entrenched adult stem cell procedures are in current US medical practice. (By the way, it’s been my experience that post Obama’s inauguration, the MSM are only to happy to talk about adult stem cell medical breakthroughs — they just keep omitting the adjective “adult”, trying to make you believe that with The One’s blessing, the dams have burst and embryonic stem cell cures are showering upon us.)

It’s almost amusing to see the MSM decrying people going outside the U.S. for ASC treatments, after they have spent the last forty years insisting that foreign countries’ “free health care” is inherently superior to our “evil” private system. (I noticed no mention of anyone going to the UK for treatment.)

It’s also very nearly funny to see them railing against people going outside the u.s. for treatments that the U.s. medical community apparently isn’t on board with. Considering that back in the “bad old days”, they were extolling the virtues of Laetrile and decrying the fact that Steve McQueen had to go to Mexico to get treated for cancer with it. (NB; he died inside of a month, anyway.)

The real reason for their disdain, of course, is that adult stem cell therapy removes the rationale for fetal stem cell therapy. Which they revere because without abortions, there is no realistic way to acquire fetal stem cells. And they are four-square in favor of anything which will increase demand for abortions, especially taxpayer-funded abortion on demand, the Holy Grail of progressives, feminist or otherwise.

It has nothing to do with “a woman’s right to choose”. (Ask them how many of them favor a “woman’s right to choose” when the choice is to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense.) It has everything to do with the deep-ecology, Paule Ehrlich/ John Holdren/ AlGore inspired desire to reduce the number of humans “parasitizing Holy Mother Gaia”.

Anything which encourages people to destroy babies is good, in their minds, because it reduces the human population- especially the population of the “wrong kind of people”. (Al’s four daughters are examples of “the right kind”- all progressive to the core, and cute besides, I suppose.)

Their philosophy is Manichaean in the extreme. Not only do they want less people, they want to use the fetuses of the “wastage” to further their own lives. This allows them to indulge their hatred of the majority of humanity, while still feeling good about themselves, and reaping benefits therefrom into the bargain. Vampires wish they had it so good, philosophically speaking.

Adult stem cell therapy, from their POV, has no “societal benefits”- i.e., it does not facilitate their Khan Noonian Singh-esque eugenics fantasies. How dare scientists discover something so- unmutual!

Once more we see that those versed in the dogmas of modern “political science” believe that “true” science is only valid if it is “politicized”, that is that it only discovers or supports things helpful to their political dogmas. I expect that any day now, somebody will demand the repeal of the Second Law of Thermodynamics so it will no longer be a handicap to “green energy” projects. (I’m looking at YOU, Paul Krugman.)

Fortunately for reality, science operates entirely in the realm of same. And no matter how much it offends the sensibilities of our “best and brightest”, two plus two continues to equal four, not five, six, or eleventy-seven-fibullion.

The one bright spot in this would be if those so determined to wax poetic about fetal stem-cell treatments, while ignoring or decrying the greater efficiency of the adult kind, were prohibited from access to the latter, on the principle of putting their money- and their health- where their mouths are. But that of course will not happen, as we live in a more-or-less free society, no matter how much our “enlightened elite’” wish it were otherwise.

In the real world, of course, they will happily use adult stem-cell therapy, or anything else, to prolong their lives. While denying that it really works that way. Accusing them of hypocrisy is pointless; they will simply respond “you are too stupid to understand our subtle and nuanced positions, peasant”.

Meanwhile, those they consider “unworthy”will be extending their own lives, and keeping their health, by simply letting actual doctors and scientists do what they do best. Namely, actual science and medicine.

Scholars of the ancient world—at least, the Greeks—considered plagiarism as that form of scholarly endeavor which most honored the field and those whose labors had before prepared the way, and the plagiarer as being one of inquiry—I wonder, would you mind it, if I appropriate some of your terms, phrases, and maybe, entire lines in whole form?

I think their motive is their sex addiction, which drives their desire to see free and chaotic orgiastic behavior in the world. They can’t have that without abortion.

Once you get the idea in your head (as I have) that modern humans are sex addicts and are unconsciously goaded on by it, you start to see it everywhere. (It’s like listening to a speaker say “um” between every other word: once you notice it you can’t stop noticing it.) In the coverage of the Fundamentalist Latter-Day Saint news stories, the interviewers like Anderson Cooper were so focused on actively smashing a sexual taboo that they were rooting for the polygamists at a ridiculous fever pitch. Anyone who came on their shows (as Flora Jessup did) to talk about the horrors of polygamy was accused of being “off-topic” and was summarilly dismissed. It was an eerie thing to watch: Anderson Cooper leaping to the defense of those staunch racists, child molesters and religious fanatics… all because they were going to help him crush a sexual taboo.

America is sex obssesed and locked in a compulsion. They keep feeding the beast and it’s taking total control. Any organization, control or chaneling of the sexual impulse (as in monogamous marriage) is not just regarded as “moralistic” but “impossible.”

I have often been struck by the cries from the left that “Government needs to stay out of our bedrooms,” when they are all too eager to have government intrude into every other room and office in our daily lives.

They are adamant about their right to control out kitchens, bathrooms, Doctors Offices, garages, etc…, but they emit shrieking howls of protest over any possible inhibition that might impact any possible stimulation and gratification of their sexual impulses.

Not only this, but they also exceedingly zealous about removing all possible consequences or stigma that might be attached to any choice that they make.

As a trained biologist, I have been disgusted for quite some time with the extreme biased reporting that you have documented in your well written article. The debate in this country on stem cell therapy seems to be promoting government spending on embryonic stem cell research without acknowledging that private money is already being spent on this line of research and purposely engaging in intellectual fraud by not reporting the tremendous successes of adult stem cell therapies and ignoring the total failures of embryonic therapies. This topic is just another example of America’s decline and the triumph of the political will of the left.

Remember how the Left tried to riducule the Nuclear industry as something humanizing atomic bombs? This is the reverse, tryign to humanise abortion by desperately trying to prove that it will cure people.

A better analogy might be how the Germans during WWII would went children’s clothes to various families. I don’t have to tell you where they got the clothes from.

I think it is too late for the USA. there are too many elitists in the political system who want to control everyone and everything. they may be small minded but they are effectively in control. the obamacare is a prime example …wait till that starts to unfold. you think things are bad now …you are in for the shock of your life.

In any area of science which has a politically controversial aspect, NO ONE should consider any concept printed in the NY Times, or parroted by a MSM anchor. If you do not have a PHD in Climatology, stem cell research, economics, international law, or Nuclear Health Physics, just ignore the input. There is some slight chance that you will be misinformed, but play the odds, and take the risk.

Our nation has ranked almost dead last in science, math, and history for the last two generations. Many Americans receive their education from late night comics. If this was not the case, the Times would have gone out of business years ago. However, the real danger to our society, is that many experts have reverted to snake oil salesmen, either for the money, or ideology. They lie, in polysyllabic words. Take every arcane truth with a grain of NaCl.

The two topics happen to be linked: Sophisticated stem cell medicine — in which a patient’s own fatty tissue is harvested and processed for the patient’s own adult (autologous) stem cells, then reinjected for regenerative healing — is available in the United States and Canada, but only for animals. Elsewhere in the world — the Regenerative Medicine Institute at Tijuana’s impressive Hospital Angeles, for example, just 20 minutes outside San Diego — adult stem cells have been shown to have remarkable efficacy in treating a variety of diseases.

This simply isn’t true. Last year, one of my coworkers had an adult stem cell infusion (his own stem cells) as part of his cancer treatment for lymphoma. This appears to be the preferred treatment over more conventional bone marrow transplants due to several factors. First, since the recipient is also the donor, there is no chance of rejection and no need for an extensive search for a compatible donor. Second, recovery time is faster and third, there’s no need for anti-rejection medications for the rest of the person’s life. My coworker is doing fine now. It’s still a very tough procedure and he still isn’t 100% but his prognosis is good. It isn’t a wonder cure-all, though. One of my brothers received adult stem cell therapy for his very rare and aggressive form of lymphoma last April and he died in June. In his case, there may have been no hope.

Beyond adult stem cell treatments in place of bone marrow transplants, a great deal of exciting research is underway. If some of these pan out, it’s possible that within 10-20 years, organ donors will be a thing of the past. Researchers are working to grow entire new organs using adult stem cells from the intended recipient, eliminating the need for donors. Every day, many people on waiting lists die for lack of a donor. Current research may one day put an end to all of that.

I saw something like that on a TV special. Stem Cells from an umbilical cord (from live birth baby) that had been grown into a bladder in Japan.

Isn’t it interesting that the only medical benefits come from adult stem cells and from the umbilical cords of babies actually allowed to be born, while trying to use cells from a murdered baby produces monsterous results? Kinda like a failsafe God programed into our DNA.

The reason is that the MSM is sensationalist, and embryonic stem cells are a hot-button political subject. Embryonic stem cell stories sell newspapers and increase ratings, while stories about adult stem cells do not.

Indeed it may be as a recent clinical trial indicates.Br J Neurosurg. 2011 Jul 12.
Abstract only available online at this time.

There are no large scale clinical trials and very little at all published in peer reviewed journals to support any kind of stem cell treatment for arthritis or joint injury.

This question, the efficacy of stem cell therapy for joint pain, has zero to do with MSM left/right politics, embryonic vs adult mesenchymal sources, pets, foreign vs US experience, liberal bias or any of the other hogwash in the article.

This is in fact the most “openly biased and shoddily reported” article I have ever read on this subject. Not one drop of scientific evidence. Not a single reason given other than the stubborn insistence that humans are the same as dogs and horses and even there not even an attempted review of vetrinary literature.

The single case report of Colon is laughable. There is no reason to think that if he had spent the entire time in Dominican Republic on the beach at Punta Cana followed by physical therapy and exercise, which he surely did – his employers would have seen to that, his results would have been any different.

This is a very complicated issue. Cartilage is a unique tissue and I wont go into the details. If it were simply a matter of isolating a certain cell line and injecting it into the joint where it will differentiate into functional cartilage, ligament or tendon that would be wonderful. But that does not happen.

I wish editors here at PJM would at least give some thought to the possibility that people may make decisions about their life and health based on this inflammatory chaff from a self described pet advocate.

If I seem a bit grouchy today it is because I have been dealing with a toothache. When I got up this morning I steeled myself to do something about it. I couldnt find any pet advocates available. I had to settle for a Dentist who referred me to an Endodontist.

If she wants to have a discussion about the ethics of embryonic stem cells, or media bias that is one thing. She goes far past that and throughout the article advocates a particular form of therapy which is unproven and could actually be harmful. Nobody knows the long term effects of injecting any kind of stem cell into a joint space.

If we want to argue that it is unethical to use embryonic cells whatever the outcome or research value then that argument needs to be rational and consistent. What I see too often is political hay where the scientific argument reverts to “team embryo” or “team adult cell” Conservatives should not fall into the global warming trap. The ethical argument needs to be clearly seperated from the scientific one if anyone is going to take it seriously.

Actually, this isn’t a true statement. They do not avoid talking about stem cells. Every time there is a spectacular cure from stem cells, they talk it up. It’s reported by every major news outlet. And of course, they make sure to mention how those mean old Republicans want to outlaw stem cell research.

Oh, they do seem to have a very consistent habit of forgetting to mention that the cure they are talking about was effected with ADULT stem cells. The only kind of stem cells they talk about is embryonic stem cells, even if those are not involved in the story in any way. In fact, to listen to the MSM, you’d never know that there is such a thing as ADULT stem cell research vs. embryonic stem cell research. To them, it’s all just, “stem cell research”, which the Republicans want to outlaw and which produces such wonderful results.

We don’t want to bother the proletariat with unimportant details, right? I mean, we wouldn’t want anybody to get confused, now, would we?

I find this article and the comments to be very gratifying, because I too have grated about the duplicity and hypocrisy of MSM and “liberal” bias on stem cell research and treatments. They would claim that “stem cell therapy” and research were “banned” in the U.S., and they do so without making any distinction between the two types of stem cells. As pointed out by others, no stem cell therapy and research has ever been banned in America.

What is also outrageous is this strange hostility towards ASC research and treatments, and I can attribute it to only one thing: it’s all bound up in their minds with the abortion issue — bizzare. Opposition by some in America to embryonic stem cell research (not by me nor a lot of non-liberals) constitutes a threat to unrestricted abortion or something.

I always suspected the stem cell usage controversy was partly based on finances.Curing long- term ,terminal diseases would seriously cut into the incomes of: medical supply co.’s,physical therapy,Dr.’s,researchers,labs,drug companies,”charity” organizations,specialty clinics,radiology and hospitals.
Think of progressive,degenerative diseases that are treated for 20-30 yrs and the incomes derived from a single case of MS,MD,Lupus,COPD etc.
I recently read 53% of baby boomers suffer from one or more illnesses.That is a whole lot of paychecks.
Besides you are talking about MSM,who only report liberal-edited stories and politicians ,who don’t care about abortion they just use the subject for votes.I wouldn’t be surprised if they used those services when in need and would be the first in line for their medical crisis cure.

This article is so rife with misinformation I don’t even know where to begin! I will focus on just ONE bit of MISinformation. There is an enormous amount of scientific literature published in the last year clearly demonstrating that pluripotent stem cells (induced from adult cells) carry all kinds of anomalies (copy number alterations, aneuploidy, epigenetic modifications, the list goes on and on) that PREDISPOSE these cells (induced adult stem cells) to become cancerous (or cancer stem cells). The same is NOT true of carefully cultured human embryonic stem cells. BTW – the same is not true of adult bone marrow stem cells (used for bone marrow transplants for decades) because adult bone marrow stem cells are NOT induced in culture to become different types of cells, rather, they are harvested from the patient (for an autologous BMT) or from a matched donor and then injected into the recipient (the patient).

your comment contradicts every other article I’ve ever read on this topic; the MSM articles do usually, eventually, point out that successful ESC treatments are from adult stem cells, and the “hairy tumor” etc caused by stem cells are from ESC. So I’m afraid I don’t believe you.

You can BELIEVE whatever you want to believe, but your believing it does not make it true. Furthermore, I have NO IDEA what you are talking about (and clearly neither do you) when you say “successful ESC treatments are from adult stem cells”.

The E in ESC stands for EMBRYONIC. EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS ARE NOT THE SAME AS ADULT STEM CELLS! EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS ARE NOT DERIVED FROM ADULT STEM CELLS! EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS ARE DERIVED FROM BLASTOCYST STAGE EMBRYOS! Thus, it is IMPOSSIBLE for there to ever be any successful (or unsuccessful) ESC treatment from ADULT stem cells.

Perhaps what you meant to say is that successful stem cell treatments to date have been developed using ADULT cells (e.g. bone marrow transplants for leukemia and lymphoma patients). But it is important to point out that the adult cells used in bone marrow transplants are not pluripotent stem cells. They are lineage restricted, MULTIPOTENT stem cells that can differentiate into blood cells.

I think you (as well as the author of this article) may have also confused hESCs (human embryonic stem cells) with iPSCs (induced pluripotent stem cells), which can be (but are not always) derived from adult cells. An iPSC is derived by adding factors (specifically four transcription factors) to a DIFFERENTIATED cell (such as a skin cell or a fat cell, but NOT a stem cell) and inducing it to DEDIFFERENTIATE back into the pluripotent state. It is these iPSCs that show numerous genetic, epigenetic and chromosomal anomalies relative to hESCs that predispose them to becoming CANCEROUS. Can a hESC become cancerous? YES, but only if not cultured CAREFULLY in vitro.

I suggest you read more biology before getting into an argument with a biologist.

Please, please, do not promote these adult stem cell clinics until *after* there are human trials demonstrating that the benefits outweigh the harm. If there are, please link to the published studies.

Treatments that sound good on paper and have nice anecdotes have proven to be harmful before–heck, in the 1920s John Brinkley had lots of glowing anecdotes about the supposed effectiveness of his absurd and harmful practices. The placebo effect is very powerful and so many conditions often get better (temporarily or permanently) on their own due to factors like getting additional rest.

And there *are* in fact human trials using non-embryonic stem cells going on or being planned right now. They are easy to find at clinicaltrials.gov. I really don’t believe most researchers are biased against non-embryonic stem cells. They have huge incentives to find effective treatments.

And there is evidence that these untested adult stem cell treatments are harmful. A private clinic in Germany (the X-Cell Center) was recently shut down after harming patients and causing the death of a child with their untested autologous stem cell treatments [1]. A quote from the report: “Criminal prosecutors are investigating the death and the case of the other child, who is now understood to be more severely disabled than when first treated at the clinic.”

There are published reports of harm, including the case of a woman who developed bizarre growths of cell masses, apparently because the stem cells injected there simply stayed and started dividing [2]. Oh, and the woman died.
I agree that there is tremendous media bias in favor of using embryonic stem cell. However, it is very unwise to promote any treatment of any kind before we know whether it works and whether it is harmful. Please don’t do it.

I admit that I don’t personally know many PETA people. One old acquaintance admitted PETA membership but couldn’t explain why she is a member. My barberette conceded PETAN sympathies and used Havaheart traps for a rodent issue until she realized she was simply spreading disease by re-locating what the Pied Piper of Hamlin did.

As noted in Part One, (http://bit.ly/ng9aR2), the mission statement of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals omits all reference to that animal designed to be the ruler of the animal pack, the animal intended by God to be at the top of the food chain, the only animal infused with an immortal soul, the human animal.

In lieu of concerns for humanity, PETA concentrates on saving and protecting lower and higher species in both the insect and animal worlds, from fleas to rats to poultry to wild birds to fish to baby seals to horses to sheep and all others in-between. It does allow for humane insect control and doesn’t seem to like backyard dogs very much since they tend to eat fleas, chickens, wild birds, and even sheep if they’re hungry enough.

According to its website, PETA primarily focuses “on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in the clothing trade, in laboratories, and in the entertainment industry.” http://bit.ly/9tndVi

That’s all very commendable and there is evidence that cruelty exists in those industries which should be prevented. However, in advocating on behalf of those animals PETA loses sight of people who greatly benefit from animal experimentation, for example, and the millions employed in those industries which PETA would shut down if it had its way.

Furthermore, for all its self-righteousness, that organization regularly engages in unconsionable excesses beyond warning that feeding meat to children is tantamount to child abuse and other outrages.

In Part One, I also noted that PETA people, with good reason, never directly proclaim that gnats, minnows, turkeys, possums, cows, et al. are equal in importance to human beings or that the many species of beasties that inhabit the planet hold equivalent planetary status to people.

PETA doesn’t say that because PETANs regard mosquitos, etc. as far superior to the human animal. They don’t hate, they don’t murder, riot, or commit mayhem and they don’t backbite, hold grudges, or vote although they often spread disease and their higher-up cousins have been known to maim and devour innocent people.

Despite its mission, PETA and its employees have also been exposed as hypocrites on a number of occasions.

In one of many instances, employees were indicted for animal cruelty and committing heinous–grossly unethical–acts of animal insensitivity. They have been accused of needlessly and surreptitiously euthanizing hundreds of animals, in at least one case because the workers reportedly wanted to party on New Year’s Eve.